marine shoots unarmed wounded Iraqi - as told by the reporter that was there

Fumanchu said:
do you think the media was irresponsible in covering this knowing that it would create more difficulties for the marine?
I trust our military enough to feel that the media has absolutely no place on the frontline. Keep them the heck out of there. I do not believe we need them as a watch-dog on bad or illegal behaviour, and I do not believe the publics 'right to know' is important enough to jeopardize our troops in any way.
 
I know it's only a movie but anybody ever see Saving Private Ryan were in one of the first scenes the Germans are holding their hands in the air obviously surrendering and the Americans blow them away anyway........what do you would happen if CNN was there to cover it that kind of thing?
Most likely we would still be fighting the Germans.

I never could understand it were some people thought war was supposed to be nice and neat and fair.......it never was and never will be.......
 
RRouuselot said:
I never could understand it were some people thought war was supposed to be nice and neat and fair.......it never was and never will be.......
Which is why the United States Constitution grants the authority to declare war in the United States Congress; US Representatives are directly elected by the citizens of each state, they can be held directly responsible for a bad decision to go to war.

This war was not declared. The Congress abdicated their responsibility.

What I find interesting among those defending the actions of this marine, is that commentary of the reporter indicates that there were other wounded in the mosque that had a higher potential of being a threat to the Marines, that were ignored.

http://www.kevinsites.net/

Immediately after going in, I see the same black plastic body bags spread around the mosque. The dead from the day before. But more surprising, I see the same five men that were wounded from Friday as well. It appears that one of them is now dead and three are bleeding to death from new gunshot wounds. The fifth is partially covered by a blanket and is in the same place and condition he was in on Friday, near a column. He has not been shot again. I look closely at both the dead and the wounded. There don't appear to be any weapons anywhere.
. . .
In the particular circumstance I was reporting, it bothered me that the Marine didn't seem to consider the other insurgents a threat -- the one very obviously moving under the blanket, or even the two next to me that were still breathing.
 
So whether you think the journalists should be there or not, they are. The Bush administration - your government - CHOSE to put them there with your troops. So while they are there, they have a responsibility to report what they witness, because that's why they're there.

To the viewers at home, well they might not understand. But they should be helped to understand, and I believe that this journalist did try to do that (I recommend reading the article referenced to get his point). He can't reasonably be held responsible for what other news outlets or various political positions do with the story. If we at home understand what goes on 'over there' better, hopefully it can help us make better choices about future wars. Like, if we don't like these realities of war, we should try harder not to get into wars. Or maybe we'll have a better understanding and respect for our soliders now that we have a clue as to what they've lived through.
 
RRouuselot said:
So has there been any updates on his situation?

I read recently that it was still under review, but that it will likely go before a court martial.
 
OULobo said:
I read recently that it was still under review, but that it will likely go before a court martial.
Yes, you are absolutley right. We will probably not hear anything about it until the decision of the court marshal is released. Unlike civilian court there is very little leaks to the press, which is how it should be.

Cheers,

Ryan
 

Latest Discussions

Back
Top